From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753670Ab3GTDUb (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 23:20:31 -0400 Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:55687 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753546Ab3GTDU2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 23:20:28 -0400 Message-ID: <51EA01C4.2010006@ti.com> Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 08:49:32 +0530 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework References: <1374129984-765-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <1374129984-765-2-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <20130718072004.GA16720@kroah.com> <51E7AE88.3050007@ti.com> <20130718154954.GA31961@kroah.com> <51E8D086.809@ti.com> <20130719054311.GA14638@kroah.com> <51E8D4E0.8060200@ti.com> <20130719062941.GA23611@kroah.com> <51E8DE51.1060404@ti.com> <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Saturday 20 July 2013 05:20 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:06:01PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>>>>>>>> + ret = dev_set_name(&phy->dev, "%s.%d", dev_name(dev), id); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your naming is odd, no "phy" anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to >>>>>>>>> never send a duplicate name.id pair? Why not create your own ids based >>>>>>>>> on the number of phys in the system, like almost all other classes and >>>>>>>>> subsystems do? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmm.. some PHY drivers use the id they provide to perform some of their >>>>>>>> internal operation as in [1] (This is used only if a single PHY provider >>>>>>>> implements multiple PHYS). Probably I'll add an option like PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO >>>>>>>> to give the PHY drivers an option to use auto id. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] -> >>>>>>>> http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20130628.134308.4a8f7668.ca.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, who cares about the id? No one outside of the phy core ever should, >>>>>>> because you pass back the only pointer that they really do care about, >>>>>>> if they need to do anything with the device. Use that, and then you can >>>>>> >>>>>> hmm.. ok. >>>>>> >>>>>>> rip out all of the "search for a phy by a string" logic, as that's not >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually this is needed for non-dt boot case. In the case of dt boot, we use a >>>>>> phandle by which the controller can get a reference to the phy. But in the case >>>>>> of non-dt boot, the controller can get a reference to the phy only by label. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand. They registered the phy, and got back a pointer to >>>>> it. Why can't they save it in their local structure to use it again >>>>> later if needed? They should never have to "ask" for the device, as the >>>> >>>> One is a *PHY provider* driver which is a driver for some PHY device. This will >>>> use phy_create to create the phy. >>>> The other is a *PHY consumer* driver which might be any controller driver (can >>>> be USB/SATA/PCIE). The PHY consumer will use phy_get to get a reference to the >>>> phy (by *phandle* in the case of dt boot and *label* in the case of non-dt boot). >>>>> device id might be unknown if there are multiple devices in the system. >>>> >>>> I agree with you on the device id part. That need not be known to the PHY driver. >>> >>> How does a consumer know which "label" to use in a non-dt system if >>> there are multiple PHYs in the system? >> >> That should be passed using platform data. > > Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform > data you can get to, then put the pointer there, don't use a "name". I don't think I understood you here :-s We wont have phy pointer when we create the device for the controller no?(it'll be done in board file). Probably I'm missing something. Thanks Kishon From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 08:49:32 +0530 Message-ID: <51EA01C4.2010006@ti.com> References: <1374129984-765-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <1374129984-765-2-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <20130718072004.GA16720@kroah.com> <51E7AE88.3050007@ti.com> <20130718154954.GA31961@kroah.com> <51E8D086.809@ti.com> <20130719054311.GA14638@kroah.com> <51E8D4E0.8060200@ti.com> <20130719062941.GA23611@kroah.com> <51E8DE51.1060404@ti.com> <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Greg KH Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, tony@atomide.com, nsekhar@ti.com, s.nawrocki@samsung.com, kgene.kim@samsung.com, swarren@nvidia.com, jg1.han@samsung.com, grant.likely@linaro.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, george.cherian@ti.com, arnd@arndb.de, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, balajitk@ti.com, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbi@ti.com, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Saturday 20 July 2013 05:20 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:06:01PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>>>>>>>> + ret = dev_set_name(&phy->dev, "%s.%d", dev_name(dev), id); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your naming is odd, no "phy" anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to >>>>>>>>> never send a duplicate name.id pair? Why not create your own ids based >>>>>>>>> on the number of phys in the system, like almost all other classes and >>>>>>>>> subsystems do? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmm.. some PHY drivers use the id they provide to perform some of their >>>>>>>> internal operation as in [1] (This is used only if a single PHY provider >>>>>>>> implements multiple PHYS). Probably I'll add an option like PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO >>>>>>>> to give the PHY drivers an option to use auto id. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] -> >>>>>>>> http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20130628.134308.4a8f7668.ca.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, who cares about the id? No one outside of the phy core ever should, >>>>>>> because you pass back the only pointer that they really do care about, >>>>>>> if they need to do anything with the device. Use that, and then you can >>>>>> >>>>>> hmm.. ok. >>>>>> >>>>>>> rip out all of the "search for a phy by a string" logic, as that's not >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually this is needed for non-dt boot case. In the case of dt boot, we use a >>>>>> phandle by which the controller can get a reference to the phy. But in the case >>>>>> of non-dt boot, the controller can get a reference to the phy only by label. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand. They registered the phy, and got back a pointer to >>>>> it. Why can't they save it in their local structure to use it again >>>>> later if needed? They should never have to "ask" for the device, as the >>>> >>>> One is a *PHY provider* driver which is a driver for some PHY device. This will >>>> use phy_create to create the phy. >>>> The other is a *PHY consumer* driver which might be any controller driver (can >>>> be USB/SATA/PCIE). The PHY consumer will use phy_get to get a reference to the >>>> phy (by *phandle* in the case of dt boot and *label* in the case of non-dt boot). >>>>> device id might be unknown if there are multiple devices in the system. >>>> >>>> I agree with you on the device id part. That need not be known to the PHY driver. >>> >>> How does a consumer know which "label" to use in a non-dt system if >>> there are multiple PHYs in the system? >> >> That should be passed using platform data. > > Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform > data you can get to, then put the pointer there, don't use a "name". I don't think I understood you here :-s We wont have phy pointer when we create the device for the controller no?(it'll be done in board file). Probably I'm missing something. Thanks Kishon From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 03:31:32 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework Message-Id: <51EA01C4.2010006@ti.com> List-Id: References: <1374129984-765-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <1374129984-765-2-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <20130718072004.GA16720@kroah.com> <51E7AE88.3050007@ti.com> <20130718154954.GA31961@kroah.com> <51E8D086.809@ti.com> <20130719054311.GA14638@kroah.com> <51E8D4E0.8060200@ti.com> <20130719062941.GA23611@kroah.com> <51E8DE51.1060404@ti.com> <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hi, On Saturday 20 July 2013 05:20 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:06:01PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>>>>>>>> + ret = dev_set_name(&phy->dev, "%s.%d", dev_name(dev), id); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your naming is odd, no "phy" anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to >>>>>>>>> never send a duplicate name.id pair? Why not create your own ids based >>>>>>>>> on the number of phys in the system, like almost all other classes and >>>>>>>>> subsystems do? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmm.. some PHY drivers use the id they provide to perform some of their >>>>>>>> internal operation as in [1] (This is used only if a single PHY provider >>>>>>>> implements multiple PHYS). Probably I'll add an option like PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO >>>>>>>> to give the PHY drivers an option to use auto id. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] -> >>>>>>>> http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20130628.134308.4a8f7668.ca.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, who cares about the id? No one outside of the phy core ever should, >>>>>>> because you pass back the only pointer that they really do care about, >>>>>>> if they need to do anything with the device. Use that, and then you can >>>>>> >>>>>> hmm.. ok. >>>>>> >>>>>>> rip out all of the "search for a phy by a string" logic, as that's not >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually this is needed for non-dt boot case. In the case of dt boot, we use a >>>>>> phandle by which the controller can get a reference to the phy. But in the case >>>>>> of non-dt boot, the controller can get a reference to the phy only by label. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand. They registered the phy, and got back a pointer to >>>>> it. Why can't they save it in their local structure to use it again >>>>> later if needed? They should never have to "ask" for the device, as the >>>> >>>> One is a *PHY provider* driver which is a driver for some PHY device. This will >>>> use phy_create to create the phy. >>>> The other is a *PHY consumer* driver which might be any controller driver (can >>>> be USB/SATA/PCIE). The PHY consumer will use phy_get to get a reference to the >>>> phy (by *phandle* in the case of dt boot and *label* in the case of non-dt boot). >>>>> device id might be unknown if there are multiple devices in the system. >>>> >>>> I agree with you on the device id part. That need not be known to the PHY driver. >>> >>> How does a consumer know which "label" to use in a non-dt system if >>> there are multiple PHYs in the system? >> >> That should be passed using platform data. > > Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform > data you can get to, then put the pointer there, don't use a "name". I don't think I understood you here :-s We wont have phy pointer when we create the device for the controller no?(it'll be done in board file). Probably I'm missing something. Thanks Kishon From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kishon@ti.com (Kishon Vijay Abraham I) Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 08:49:32 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 01/15] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework In-Reply-To: <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> References: <1374129984-765-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <1374129984-765-2-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com> <20130718072004.GA16720@kroah.com> <51E7AE88.3050007@ti.com> <20130718154954.GA31961@kroah.com> <51E8D086.809@ti.com> <20130719054311.GA14638@kroah.com> <51E8D4E0.8060200@ti.com> <20130719062941.GA23611@kroah.com> <51E8DE51.1060404@ti.com> <20130719235055.GB11498@kroah.com> Message-ID: <51EA01C4.2010006@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On Saturday 20 July 2013 05:20 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:06:01PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:59 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:25:44AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Friday 19 July 2013 11:13 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:07:10AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>>>>>>>> + ret = dev_set_name(&phy->dev, "%s.%d", dev_name(dev), id); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Your naming is odd, no "phy" anywhere in it? You rely on the sender to >>>>>>>>> never send a duplicate name.id pair? Why not create your own ids based >>>>>>>>> on the number of phys in the system, like almost all other classes and >>>>>>>>> subsystems do? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmm.. some PHY drivers use the id they provide to perform some of their >>>>>>>> internal operation as in [1] (This is used only if a single PHY provider >>>>>>>> implements multiple PHYS). Probably I'll add an option like PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO >>>>>>>> to give the PHY drivers an option to use auto id. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] -> >>>>>>>> http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20130628.134308.4a8f7668.ca.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, who cares about the id? No one outside of the phy core ever should, >>>>>>> because you pass back the only pointer that they really do care about, >>>>>>> if they need to do anything with the device. Use that, and then you can >>>>>> >>>>>> hmm.. ok. >>>>>> >>>>>>> rip out all of the "search for a phy by a string" logic, as that's not >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually this is needed for non-dt boot case. In the case of dt boot, we use a >>>>>> phandle by which the controller can get a reference to the phy. But in the case >>>>>> of non-dt boot, the controller can get a reference to the phy only by label. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand. They registered the phy, and got back a pointer to >>>>> it. Why can't they save it in their local structure to use it again >>>>> later if needed? They should never have to "ask" for the device, as the >>>> >>>> One is a *PHY provider* driver which is a driver for some PHY device. This will >>>> use phy_create to create the phy. >>>> The other is a *PHY consumer* driver which might be any controller driver (can >>>> be USB/SATA/PCIE). The PHY consumer will use phy_get to get a reference to the >>>> phy (by *phandle* in the case of dt boot and *label* in the case of non-dt boot). >>>>> device id might be unknown if there are multiple devices in the system. >>>> >>>> I agree with you on the device id part. That need not be known to the PHY driver. >>> >>> How does a consumer know which "label" to use in a non-dt system if >>> there are multiple PHYs in the system? >> >> That should be passed using platform data. > > Ick, don't pass strings around, pass pointers. If you have platform > data you can get to, then put the pointer there, don't use a "name". I don't think I understood you here :-s We wont have phy pointer when we create the device for the controller no?(it'll be done in board file). Probably I'm missing something. Thanks Kishon